b. Under Rawlsian theory, O the suffering of one billion outweighs the life of one regardless of the severity of the headache. O if the person facing the horrible death voluntarily accepts it, then sacrificing that person to end the discomfort of one billion people is justified. O there is no level of headache severity such that the suffering of one billion outweighs the life of one. O there is some level of headache severity such that the suffering of one billion outweighs the life of one, but there is also some level of headache severity such that the opposite is true.Ethics and Public Policy: End of Chapter Problem Philosopher Alastair Norcross poses the following question. Suppose that 1 billion people are suffering from a moderately severe headache that will last a few hours. The only way to alleviate their headache is for one person to die a horrible death. Can the death of this one person ever be justied in a costbenet sense? Evaluate this question in terms of both utilitarian theory and Rawlsian theory. a. Under utilitarian theory, 0 the suffering of one billion outweighs the life of one regardless of the severity of the headache. 0 there is some level of headache severity such that the suffering of one billion outweighs the life of one, but there is also some level of headache severity such that the opposite is true. 0 there is no level of headache severity such that the suffering of one billion outweighs the life of one. 0 if the person facing the horrible death voluntarily accepts it, then sacricing that person to end the discomfort of one billion people is justied